Traditionalist Issues
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Our Lady of Fatima Disproves
Sede-Vacantism
Sede-vacantists believe that after John XXIII the Popes are not valid Popes, the Seat of Peter is vacant and, therefore, their papal powers and sacraments are not valid as well. There are other groups in this category, such as the “sede-privationists” who believe that the conciliar Popes are valid but they lack papal authority. Both these groups defend their points by quoting saints, conciliar documents, and Scripture in order to justify their rejection of the papal powers and to attack our position of Resistance.
Due to the excommunications of SSPX and the increasing profanations we are witnessing by progressivists, many Catholics are being pushed into sede-vacantism. Its leaders do what they can to drag others down with them. Viewing themselves as experts on Catholic doctrine and the current crisis, they enter discussions with anyone who is shocked by the present-day crisis to induce him to adhere to their positions.
Skip the futile ‘council’ debates
To discuss with sede-vacantists is like to discuss with Protestants. There is no way to convince them of the truth because they "are always right" and you "are always wrong." In other words, the leader of each of these splits considers himself invested with some sort of infallibility that enables him to decide what pope, sacrament and liturgic rule is valid, along with many other important religious topics. In practice it is free-examination applied not only to the interpretation of the Bible, but to the ensemble of the Catholic doctrine.
Of course, when there are two of these mini infallible popes disagreeing on some interpretations, each one declares the other a heretic and they split. Here is why sede-vacantist groups are increasingly fragmented. Protestants are divided into about 40,000 different fractions; sede-vacantists are following the same path...
Sede-vacantists are eager to debate because they need to continually reaffirm their false position to themselves and to their followers. If they do not, they run the risk of letting their minds question the obvious holes in their theory and thus gravitate back to a good Catholic position. It is the same insecurity Protestants have.
Rather than entering an endless debate of quotes and interpretations, I suggest that traditionalists speaking to a sede-vacantist on the topic simply remind him how the prophecies of Our Lady of Fatima disprove sede-vacantism.
The consecration was not made
Our Lady of Fatima commanded the Pope to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart. As Dr. Marian Horvat showed us, the eight attempts to consecrate Russia failed because each one missed some of Our Lady’s requirements. Therefore, a Pope has yet to consecrate Russia to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart following all of her demands, which means the man who currently sits in the Chair of St. Peter is the Pope and that he or one of his successors will still make the consecration as Our Lady predicted at Fatima, even if it
will be late.
It is a lot harder for a sede-vacantist to try and interpret these prophecies in their own light because Our Lady gave us a very clear list of things that would occur before and after her command was fulfilled. Anyone with common sense sees that essential parts of her prophecies have not come to pass and so the consecration has not been fulfilled.
When confronted with Fatima, some sede-vacantists attempt to justify their position in a quite singular way. Below, I will refute their arguments about Fatima found here and there on the Internet. My hope is to vaccinate any traditionalist who is tempted to assume this nonsensical position.
Perspective on the 1952 consecration
When addressing Fatima, several sede-vacantists argue in a way that appear to me quite weak:
1. They believe the consecration performed by Pius XII in 1952 was done correctly. This seems to me a tailored belief: they have to defend this since they do not accept that any Pope after Pius XII has authority.
However, as stated earlier, Dr. Horvat clearly demonstrates what was missing in that consecration: It was not a solemn and public act nor was it said in union with the Bishops of the world; there was no act of Reparation or the First Saturdays devotion. Further, Sister Lucia herself stated that the three consecrations by Pope Pius XII did not meet the conditions set by Our Lady.
This first mistake projects other consequences: Since they believe the consecration was made in 1952, they have to explain what happened to Russia. So, they pretend that the “conversion of Russia” that Our Lady predicted would happen after the act would be made, does not mean to convert to Catholicism, but rather to convert to peace.
2. The attempt to reframe Our Lady’s meaning of conversion is bad enough, but to suggest that Russia has actually converted to peace is no less delusional. Some sede-vacantists go as far as to defend that Russia had a time of peace after 1952 to justify its "conversion." They essentially argue that Russia changed from being a monstrous regime to one less monstrous by providing statistics showing how, after 1952, there were fewer deaths, gulags, famines and persecutions.This is what they say about the supposed "conversion of Russia."
When we think of the Soviet tanks crushing the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961 and the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, we cannot say that the USSR (or Russia) changed anything in its habitual aggressive way. Therefore, to speak of conversion of Russia to peace after 1952 is absurd.
We are facing a second mistake, based on the falsity that the Pius XII consecration was what Our Lady desired.
3. Another flaw regards Our Lady's phrase “a certain period of peace will be granted to the world.” Several sede-vacantists pretend that after 1952 consecration by Pius XII that peace was established in the world.
However, such a period of peace never came after 1952. The continuous conflicts after that date prove that the world did not experience this peace. On top of this, Russia itself supported various conflicts such as the Korean War, which was still ongoing in 1952, as well as the Vietnam War, which would start in 1955 and take the lives of three million Vietnamese civilians and service members.
Again these sede-vacantisits are entirely out of reality.
4. Another nonsensical argument is that the sede-vacantists basically say that Russia spread its errors before 1952 and so this portion of the prophecy was fulfilled. Then, they claim that after that date, Russia stop spreading those errors.
While it is true that Russian errors were spreading before that supposed consecration, they did not stop after 1952. On the contrary, the rapid rise in communist ideas throughout the West, Latin America and Africa after the 1950s shows clearly that these errors spread far more than before the ’52 consecration. Let us not forget that China fell under Communism in 1949 and from then on the Communist Party killed millions of its own people, with much of the violence concentrated in the period of the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976).
To suggest that this period after 1952 was somehow a period in which Russia stopped its propaganda, is incredibly delusional in any way, shape or form.
5. How do some sede-vacantists explain Our Lady's prophecies of an enormous chastisement against nations? They say that “nations being annihilated” is something that has already happened since Russia absorbed various nations as satellite states. This somehow means they were "annihilated" since they were no longer their own nation states.
If to be conquered by another nation would mean to be annihilated, Spain and Portugal would also have been annihilated, since they remained under the Arab domination for centuries; many countries in Europe that were conquered by Napoleon would have been annihilated; France, Belgium and other countries that succumbed to the Nazi invasion would also have been annihilated. This is simply not true.
These sede-vacantists force the meaning of “being annihilated” in order to fit their theory that the post-Pius XII Popes are not valid. It is not only wrong; it is maliciously dishonest.
So, my conclusion is that these sede-vacantists are basically wrong and dishonest when it comes to interpreting Our Lady of Fatima's message. Their defenders tailor historical reality to fit their thesis.
Based on this analysis, I encourage traditionalists to stop debating doctrine with sede-vacantists and tell those who are tempted to enter this wrong position to read honestly Fatima's message. Let them read also this article to see how the sede-vacantists say Our Lady’s prophecies have been fulfilled. I hope that doing so they may set aside any sede-vacantist temptation they might be experiencing.
Be sober and watch: because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, goeth about seeking whom he may devour. . (1 Pet 5:8)
Due to the excommunications of SSPX and the increasing profanations we are witnessing by progressivists, many Catholics are being pushed into sede-vacantism. Its leaders do what they can to drag others down with them. Viewing themselves as experts on Catholic doctrine and the current crisis, they enter discussions with anyone who is shocked by the present-day crisis to induce him to adhere to their positions.
Skip the futile ‘council’ debates
To discuss with sede-vacantists is like to discuss with Protestants. There is no way to convince them of the truth because they "are always right" and you "are always wrong." In other words, the leader of each of these splits considers himself invested with some sort of infallibility that enables him to decide what pope, sacrament and liturgic rule is valid, along with many other important religious topics. In practice it is free-examination applied not only to the interpretation of the Bible, but to the ensemble of the Catholic doctrine.
The chair is empty, insist the sedes...
Sede-vacantists are eager to debate because they need to continually reaffirm their false position to themselves and to their followers. If they do not, they run the risk of letting their minds question the obvious holes in their theory and thus gravitate back to a good Catholic position. It is the same insecurity Protestants have.
Rather than entering an endless debate of quotes and interpretations, I suggest that traditionalists speaking to a sede-vacantist on the topic simply remind him how the prophecies of Our Lady of Fatima disprove sede-vacantism.
The consecration was not made
The papal consecrations did not fulfill
all of the demands of Our Lady
It is a lot harder for a sede-vacantist to try and interpret these prophecies in their own light because Our Lady gave us a very clear list of things that would occur before and after her command was fulfilled. Anyone with common sense sees that essential parts of her prophecies have not come to pass and so the consecration has not been fulfilled.
When confronted with Fatima, some sede-vacantists attempt to justify their position in a quite singular way. Below, I will refute their arguments about Fatima found here and there on the Internet. My hope is to vaccinate any traditionalist who is tempted to assume this nonsensical position.
Perspective on the 1952 consecration
When addressing Fatima, several sede-vacantists argue in a way that appear to me quite weak:
Pius XII made it without the Bishops
However, as stated earlier, Dr. Horvat clearly demonstrates what was missing in that consecration: It was not a solemn and public act nor was it said in union with the Bishops of the world; there was no act of Reparation or the First Saturdays devotion. Further, Sister Lucia herself stated that the three consecrations by Pope Pius XII did not meet the conditions set by Our Lady.
This first mistake projects other consequences: Since they believe the consecration was made in 1952, they have to explain what happened to Russia. So, they pretend that the “conversion of Russia” that Our Lady predicted would happen after the act would be made, does not mean to convert to Catholicism, but rather to convert to peace.
2. The attempt to reframe Our Lady’s meaning of conversion is bad enough, but to suggest that Russia has actually converted to peace is no less delusional. Some sede-vacantists go as far as to defend that Russia had a time of peace after 1952 to justify its "conversion." They essentially argue that Russia changed from being a monstrous regime to one less monstrous by providing statistics showing how, after 1952, there were fewer deaths, gulags, famines and persecutions.This is what they say about the supposed "conversion of Russia."
When we think of the Soviet tanks crushing the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961 and the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, we cannot say that the USSR (or Russia) changed anything in its habitual aggressive way. Therefore, to speak of conversion of Russia to peace after 1952 is absurd.
We are facing a second mistake, based on the falsity that the Pius XII consecration was what Our Lady desired.
They insist there was a time of peace... even as the Vietnam, above, & Korean Wars, below, waged on
However, such a period of peace never came after 1952. The continuous conflicts after that date prove that the world did not experience this peace. On top of this, Russia itself supported various conflicts such as the Korean War, which was still ongoing in 1952, as well as the Vietnam War, which would start in 1955 and take the lives of three million Vietnamese civilians and service members.
Again these sede-vacantisits are entirely out of reality.
4. Another nonsensical argument is that the sede-vacantists basically say that Russia spread its errors before 1952 and so this portion of the prophecy was fulfilled. Then, they claim that after that date, Russia stop spreading those errors.
While it is true that Russian errors were spreading before that supposed consecration, they did not stop after 1952. On the contrary, the rapid rise in communist ideas throughout the West, Latin America and Africa after the 1950s shows clearly that these errors spread far more than before the ’52 consecration. Let us not forget that China fell under Communism in 1949 and from then on the Communist Party killed millions of its own people, with much of the violence concentrated in the period of the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976).
To suggest that this period after 1952 was somehow a period in which Russia stopped its propaganda, is incredibly delusional in any way, shape or form.
5. How do some sede-vacantists explain Our Lady's prophecies of an enormous chastisement against nations? They say that “nations being annihilated” is something that has already happened since Russia absorbed various nations as satellite states. This somehow means they were "annihilated" since they were no longer their own nation states.
If to be conquered by another nation would mean to be annihilated, Spain and Portugal would also have been annihilated, since they remained under the Arab domination for centuries; many countries in Europe that were conquered by Napoleon would have been annihilated; France, Belgium and other countries that succumbed to the Nazi invasion would also have been annihilated. This is simply not true.
These sede-vacantists force the meaning of “being annihilated” in order to fit their theory that the post-Pius XII Popes are not valid. It is not only wrong; it is maliciously dishonest.
The endless debate... a fool’s game
Based on this analysis, I encourage traditionalists to stop debating doctrine with sede-vacantists and tell those who are tempted to enter this wrong position to read honestly Fatima's message. Let them read also this article to see how the sede-vacantists say Our Lady’s prophecies have been fulfilled. I hope that doing so they may set aside any sede-vacantist temptation they might be experiencing.
Be sober and watch: because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, goeth about seeking whom he may devour. . (1 Pet 5:8)
Posted September 11, 2026
______________________
______________________
 Volume I |
 Volume II |
 Volume III |
 Volume IV |
 Volume V |
 Volume VI |
 Volume VII |
 Volume VIII |
 Volume IX |
 Volume X |
 Volume XI |
 Special Edition |